D&D Editions go Creative Commons

World_Warrior · May 07, 2024, 06:00:40 PM

So, didn't notice anyone sharing this. If I am reading it correctly, not only will the new edition be available in Creative Commons, but WOTC are looking to release the older editions as such. They are just concerned with ensuring the new release goes first, then will hopefully release old editions in 2025. Take all that with a grain of salt.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1717-2024-core-rulebooks-to-expand-the-srd

Brad · May 07, 2024, 07:11:53 PM

This is really convenient considering most publishers are now releasing non-SRD versions of their stuff now. WotC never fails to amaze me with their foresight and intellect.

World_Warrior · May 07, 2024, 07:25:38 PM

Quote from: Brad on May 07, 2024, 07:11:53 PMThis is really convenient considering most publishers are now releasing non-SRD versions of their stuff now. WotC never fails to amaze me with their foresight and intellect.

If all of it is true, it brings to mind several thoughts:

1. D&D's value as a game from a corporate stance is "dead". Only the "brand" means anything to Hadbro.

2. Older Editions as CC means a lot of the OSR can shift away from the OGL and not buy in to the ORC license.

3. WOTC really wants to trick their fans into believing they are on the side of the "indie creators".

4. The OGL did massive damage to their publicity. Probably the only thing that could unite all political sides for 1 day was putting them on blast for the OGL bullshit.

Nakana · May 08, 2024, 02:49:15 AM

First and foremost, fuck WoTC, Amen.
Second, I still love me some d20 Modern and D&D 4E.
Lastly, for any publishers thinking about waiting a year or more for an SRD or license:

Spoiler

Stop waiting for permission, nut up or tit up, and write your own clone in your own language. The rules/mechanics are not copyrightable. Don't use their language -- that's the ONLY thing the license is good for, giving you permission to use their LANGUAGE. Roll up your sleeves, and do the work yourself. Create and publish your own ORIGINAL work with any license you want (or none at all if you like).

honeydipperdavid · May 08, 2024, 12:22:58 PM

The issue is items created by TSR and WotC, like using the term: Otiluke's Resilient Sphere or Melf's Acid Arrows, you can still use them just drop the name. Say you want to use the bulette, ok by SRD but not the mind flayers.

There is nothing wrong covering bases, use the creative commons license and move on personally. Reuse the monsters there and create your own flavor of existing monsters that are creatively distinct, like what Collvile did with his Mind Flayers or his Beholder. We all know what Matt did, but WotC can't do anything about it.

https://www.5esrd.com/database/creature/

RPGPundit · May 08, 2024, 04:33:26 PM

So the more accurate title for this thread would be "D&D Editions Still Haven't Gone Creative Commons"

World_Warrior · May 08, 2024, 07:23:38 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 08, 2024, 04:33:26 PMSo the more accurate title for this thread would be "D&D Editions Still Haven't Gone Creative Commons"

Sure. Not yet. But, soon. Which, by the way, was Baptism of Fire published under one of the licenses, or did you manage to avoid that burden? I hadn't heard anything from you (though may have missed it) what your decision was moving forward.

Venka · May 09, 2024, 01:40:50 AM

I mean, it's still good news that they are still planning on releasing them under CC. CC is a real license. They gave more definitive news that their "5.5" SRD will be released within around a year from now using CC as well.

World_Warrior · May 09, 2024, 06:38:33 AM

Quote from: Venka on May 09, 2024, 01:40:50 AMI mean, it's still good news that they are still planning on releasing them under CC. CC is a real license. They gave more definitive news that their "5.5" SRD will be released within around a year from now using CC as well.

Even though I'm the OP, even I take it with a grain of salt... This is WOTC we are talking about. Though my guess is, it could be a complete reversal of the bullshit Walled Garden they were planning. My guess is, things haven't been working out behind the scenes, if all the news indicates.

RPGPundit · May 09, 2024, 07:04:17 AM

Quote from: World_Warrior on May 08, 2024, 07:23:38 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit on May 08, 2024, 04:33:26 PMSo the more accurate title for this thread would be "D&D Editions Still Haven't Gone Creative Commons"

Sure. Not yet. But, soon. Which, by the way, was Baptism of Fire published under one of the licenses, or did you manage to avoid that burden? I hadn't heard anything from you (though may have missed it) what your decision was moving forward.

With my books, I leave the ultimate decision up to the publishers. In this case, the publisher put it under the OGL. Personally, I think that a non-clone OSR game doesn't really need to be under any license.

JeremyR · May 09, 2024, 06:10:08 PM

The problem is that while D&D might go CC, all the other 3rd party stuff released over the years still uses the OGL. And AFAIK, that includes the Tome of Horrors, where a lot of non-SRD monsters were released.

And the CC license is not so secure. It's got a problem that makes it (or did) prone to copyright trolls

https://creativecommons.org/2022/02/08/copyleft-trolls/

https://doctorow.medium.com/a-bug-in-early-creative-commons-licenses-has-enabled-a-new-breed-of-superpredator-5f6360713299

Ruprecht · May 09, 2024, 08:15:25 PM

Couldn't they just re-release any OGL product under the new license if WotC released it under the new license? Barring any changes they might make due to IP or whatever that is.

swzl · May 09, 2024, 09:15:41 PM

Quote from: Ruprecht on May 09, 2024, 08:15:25 PMCouldn't they just re-release any OGL product under the new license if WotC released it under the new license? Barring any changes they might make due to IP or whatever that is.

Short answer, no. Section 2 of the OGL states:

Quote2. The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License. You must affix such a notice to any Open Game Content that you Use. No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself. No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed using this License.

Mistwell · May 10, 2024, 01:05:00 AM

Quote from: swzl on May 09, 2024, 09:15:41 PM
Quote from: Ruprecht on May 09, 2024, 08:15:25 PMCouldn't they just re-release any OGL product under the new license if WotC released it under the new license? Barring any changes they might make due to IP or whatever that is.

Short answer, no. Section 2 of the OGL states:
Quote2. The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License. You must affix such a notice to any Open Game Content that you Use. No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself. No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed using this License.

Not sure that clause means what you think it means. I do think you can republish your own copyrighted content under the CC even if it was previously published under the OGL. It will still be open content under the OGL though. I mean, this is literally what WOTC just did.

World_Warrior · May 10, 2024, 03:58:26 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 09, 2024, 07:04:17 AM
Quote from: World_Warrior on May 08, 2024, 07:23:38 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit on May 08, 2024, 04:33:26 PMSo the more accurate title for this thread would be "D&D Editions Still Haven't Gone Creative Commons"

Sure. Not yet. But, soon. Which, by the way, was Baptism of Fire published under one of the licenses, or did you manage to avoid that burden? I hadn't heard anything from you (though may have missed it) what your decision was moving forward.

With my books, I leave the ultimate decision up to the publishers. In this case, the publisher put it under the OGL. Personally, I think that a non-clone OSR game doesn't really need to be under any license.

Especially because you don't reuse any wording from the SRD. At least what I've ever seen.